Superpositioned: The U.S. and the U.K. Compete for Hegemony as Western Quantum Leaders
Bailee Dobson and Claire Parsons
The United Kingdom and the United States have been allies for decades; however, these friends now find themselves racing for hegemonic leadership in emerging quantum technologies.
Quantum technologies are developing quickly and promise a disruption to the status quo at a scale that only science-fiction could previously imagine. Primary research areas include computing, sensing, communications, and cryptography and for nations around the globe, quantum technology offers faster and more secure pathways to advance their goals. Quantum computers are expected to break classic cryptographic standards within seconds, rendering current security protocols obsolete. Thus, nations like the US and the UK are racing to secure quantum capabilities both to harness extreme power and protect critical infrastructure from adversaries’ technologies.
In 2018, the United States authorized the National Quantum Initiative Act (NQI). Through this act, the U.S. accelerated its pursuit of quantum technology, with 10 national institutions focusing on sensing, networking, and computing. While the act is authorized for 10 years, its funding expired at the end of September 2023, having only been active for 5 years. In the event of a rejection of funding reauthorization or a government shutdown, all NQI-sponsored quantum initiatives grind to a halt. However, this does not mean that U.S. quantum development stops. Within the United States, industry leaders such as Google and IBM are making large strides in quantum, especially in quantum computing. These private sector developments ensure that US-based quantum remains competitive, no matter the status of the NQI Act. The largest difference between the US and other like-minded nations when it comes to quantum is this partnership with industry. While this does offer the US a unique advantage through expanded development efforts, these partnerships are led more by industry than the federal government, bringing into question whether these are true partnerships or simply a reliance on industry to maintain US advantage.
Unlike their American allies, the United Kingdom’s National Quantum Technologies Programme has not relied on industry. Its execution is through academic institutions and newly developed quantum computing centres funded by hundreds of millions of pounds over the next decade. Like the US, the UK’s strategy is funded through Research and Innovation and the Ministry of Defence, giving the UK government control over the developments. While the American system has been devoted to sensors and quantum internet, the British strategy has been narrowly focused on quantum computing with a new national development centre. The British strategy is to cement a leadership position by fast-tracking development in hopes of laying exclusive claim to the world’s first quantum computer. Such an advancement would put the UK at the forefront of the quantum race and in a position of diplomatic advantage with adversaries and allies. Due to the funding having no blockages from the shift of the economy nor from political strife and shutdowns, the United Kingdom’s progress is steady in contrast to the United States which experiences moments of sudden advancements and breakthroughs.
The United Kingdom has positioned itself for the long-term as a competitor to its American ally. Britain’s promising progress in the technological race can be credited to its political stability. Partisan politics aside, the resilience of the parliamentary system in comparison to the presidential system is a non-negotiable factor which has contributed to the UK’s ability to get ahead. The threat of a government shutdown within the United States would pause any public quantum development. A government shutdown is not a legal possibility in the United Kingdom, guaranteeing funding funnelling to centres even in times of severe political conflict. Beyond the continual guarantee of governance, the plotted strategies of the UK are already locked in progress until the year 2030 and are likely to be extended without political resistance. More so, due to limited private engagement via banking investments in UK quantum, the United Kingdom can designate exactly what it wishes to study and develop. With multiple research alliances and academic institutions funded via graduate research grants and programs, the UK has established a robust pipeline for highly qualified personnel to ensure a sufficient supply of quantum talent. By streamlining the control of quantum development through the Parliamentary system, the UK also solidifies their ability to assign quantum technology as it develops their defence forces without the competition of procurement from private industry.
The United States federal government currently does not have a clear consensus on how the government should be involved or how its resources should be targeted. Moreover, unlike the UK, the US government does not have streamlined control of quantum development. In the event of a government shutdown, federal quantum initiatives and partnerships grind to a halt while private industry developments continue unmonitored and outside of federal influence. Due to this, the US cannot enforce targeted funding through its largest development partners, requiring them to prepare to purchase technology from industry partners before they are commercialized to a broader global market. This extra step may slow US quantum integration. In contrast, the United Kingdom has targeted funding towards the goal of developing a quantum computer by 2023. The bulk of these developments have occurred in public quantum centres, allowing the government direct oversight of all R&D efforts no matter the domestic political situation. Early successes include the United Kingdom’s ability to integrate an atomic clock onto one of their navy ships.
Despite the scramble for quantum leadership, the UK and the US cooperate as proud allies, Five Eyes members, and NATO leaders. The stability maintained by the UK system allows for steady quantum development contrary to the US’ more volatile funding structure.
Bailee Dobson and Claire Parsons are research assistants with the Centre for International and Defence Policy affiliated with the project “QFVEY: Quantum Security, Strategy, and Technology in Five Eyes Nations.” This project has received funding from the Department of National Defence via a Targeted Engagement Grant through the Mobilizing Insights in Defence and Security (MINDS) Program. The views and opinions discussed in this blog do not necessarily reflect the views or positions of the Department of National Defence or the Canadian Armed Forces.
